Titaness Light Shop, LLC v. Sunlight Supply, Inc. et al

Filing 36

ORDER denying 32 Motion to Strike. Plaintiff shall file sur-reply re 23 MOTION for Preliminary Injunction of no more than 10 pages within 15 days. Signed by Judge Larry R. Hicks on 5/9/13. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JC)

1
2
3
4
5
6

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8

***
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

9

TITANESS LIGHT SHOP, LLC,

10

Plaintiff,

11

v.

12

SUNLIGHT SUPPLY INC.; et al.,

13

Defendants.

3:12-cv-0620-LRH-VPC
ORDER

14
15

Before the court is plaintiff and counter-defendant Titaness Light Shop, LLC’s (“TLC”)

16

motion to strike portions of defendants Sunlight Supply Inc. and IP Holdings, LLC’s (collectively

17

“defendants”) reply in support of defendants’ motion for preliminary injunction (Doc. #311). Doc.

18

#32. Defendants filed an opposition (Doc. #34) to which TLC replied (Doc. #35).

19

The court may strike a filing for “any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous

20

matter.” FED. R. CIV. P. 12(f). Further, to the extent that a party raises a new argument or proffers

21

new evidence and information in a reply brief, that argument or evidence is improper because the

22

opposing party is deprived of an opportunity to respond. Tovar v. United States Postal Service, 3

23

F.3d 1271, 1273 n.3 (9th Cir. 1993). Therefore, the court cannot consider new evidence provided in

24

a reply when the other party does not have an opportunity to respond to the evidence. Provenz v.

25

Miller, 102 F.3d 1478, 1483 (9th Cir. 1996).

26
1

Refers to the court’s docket number.

1

Here, defendants argue that their reply brief only responds to certain arguments raised in

2

TLC’s opposition, and as such, these arguments should not be stricken from the reply. The court

3

agrees. However, the court finds that based on the breadth of arguments raised in the reply, TLC

4

should be granted an opportunity to provide a brief response. See Cedars-Sinai Medical Center v.

5

Shalala, 177 F.3d 1126, 1129 (9th Cir. 1999) (a court has the inherent authority to grant leave to a

6

party to file a sur-reply when the information would be germane to the court’s evaluation of a

7

pending matter). Therefore, the court shall deny TLC’s motion to strike, but allow TLC to file a

8

sur-reply.

9
10

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that plaintiff’s motion to strike (Doc. #32) is DENIED.

11

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that plaintiff shall file a brief sur-reply to defendants’ motion

12

for a preliminary injunction of no more than ten (10) pages, within fifteen (15) days of entry of this

13

order.

14

IT IS SO ORDERED.

15

DATED this 9th day of May, 2013.

16
17

__________________________________
LARRY R. HICKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
2